Throughout this application various references are referred to within parentheses. Disclosures of these publications in their entireties are hereby incorporated by reference into this application to more fully describe the state of the art to which this invention pertains. Full bibliographic citation for these references may be found at the end of each set of Examples in the Experimental Details section.
Prostate cancer is among the most significant medical problems in the United States, as the disease is now the most common malignancy diagnosed in American males. In 1992 there were over 132,000 new cases of prostate cancer detected with over 36,000 deaths attributable to the disease, representing a 17.3% increase over 4 years (8). Five year survival rates for patients with prostate cancer range from 88% for those with localized disease to 29% for those with metastatic disease. The rapid increase in the number of cases appears to result in part from an increase in disease awareness as well as the widespread use of clinical markers such as the secreted proteins prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) (7).
The prostate gland is a site of significant pathology affected by conditions such as benign growth (BPH), neoplasia (prostatic cancer) and infection (prostatitis). Prostate cancer represents the second leading cause of death from cancer in man (7). However prostatic cancer is the leading site for cancer development in men. The difference between these two facts relates to prostatic cancer occurring with increasing frequency as men age, especially in the ages beyond 60 at a time when death from other factors often intervenes. Also, the spectrum of biologic aggressiveness of prostatic cancer is great, so that in some men following detection the tumor remains a latent histologic tumor and does not become clinically significant, whereas in other it progresses rapidly, metastasizes and kills the man in a relatively short 2-5 year period (7 and 59).
In prostate cancer cells, two specific proteins that are made in very high concentrations are prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) and prostate specific antigen (PSA) (21, 47, and 65). These proteins have been characterized and have been used to follow response to therapy. With the development of cancer, the normal architecture of the gland becomes altered, including loss of the normal duct structure for the removal of secretions and thus the secretions reach the serum. Indeed measurement of serum PSA is suggested as a potential screening method for prostatic cancer. Indeed, the relative amount of PSA and/or PAP in the cancer reduces as compared to normal or benign tissue. PAP was one of the earliest serum markers for detecting metastatic spread (47). PAP hydrolyses tyrosine phosphate and has a broad substrate specificity. Tyrosine phosphorylation is often increased with oncogenic transformation. It has been hypothesized that during neoplastic transformation there is less phosphatase activity available to inactivate proteins that are activated by phosphorylation on tyrosine residues. In some instances, insertion of phosphatases that have tyrosine phosphatase activity has reversed the malignant phenotype.
PSA is a protease and it is not readily appreciated how loss of its activity correlates with cancer development (21, and 65). The proteolytic activity of PSA is inhibited by zinc. Zinc concentrations are high in the normal prostate and reduced in prostatic cancer. Possibly the loss of zinc allows for increased proteolytic activity by PSA. As proteases are involved in metastasis and some proteases stimulate mitotic activity, the potentially increased activity of PSA could be hypothesized to play a role in the tumors metastases and spread (39).
Both PSA and PAP are found in prostatic secretions. Both appear to be dependent on the presence of androgens for their production and are substantially reduced following androgen deprivation.
Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSM) which appears to be localized to the prostatic membrane has been identified. This antigen was identified as the result of generating monoclonal antibodies to a prostatic cancer cell, LNCaP (22).
Dr. Horoszewicz established a cell line designated LNCaP from the lymph node of a hormone refractory, heavily pretreated patient (23). This line was found to have an aneuploid human male karyotype. It maintained prostatic differentiation functionality in that it produced both PSA and PAP. It possessed an androgen receptor of high affinity and specificity. Mice were immunized with LNCaP cells and hybridomas were derived from sensitized animals. A monoclonal antibody was derived and was designated 7E11-C5 (22). The antibody staining was consistent with a membrane location and isolated fractions of LNCaP cell membranes exhibited a strongly positive reaction with immunoblotting and ELISA techniques. This antibody did not inhibit or enhance the growth of LNCaP cells in vitro or in vivo. The antibody to this antigen was remarkably specific to prostatic epithelial cells, as no reactivity was observed in any other component. Immunohistochemical staining of cancerous epithelial cells was more intense than that of normal or benign epithelial cells.
Dr. Horoszewicz also reported detection of immunoreactive material using 7E11-C5 in serum of prostatic cancer patients (22). The immunoreactivity was detectable in nearly 60% of patients with stage D-2 disease and in a slightly lower percentage of patients with earlier stage disease, but the numbers of patients in the latter group are small. Patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were negative. Patients with no apparent disease were negative, but 50-60% of patients in remission yet with active stable disease or with progression demonstrated positive serum reactivity. Patients with non prostatic tumors did not show immunoreactivity with 7E11-C5.
The 7E11-C5 monoclonal antibody is currently in clinical trials. The aldehyde groups of the antibody were oxidized and the linker-chelator glycol-tyrosyl-(n, xcex5-diethylenetriamine-pentacetic acid)-lysine (GYK-DTPA) was coupled to the reactive aldehydes of the heavy chain. The resulting antibody was designated CYT-356. Immunohistochemical staining patterns were similar except that the CYT-356 modified antibody stained skeletal muscle. The comparison of CYT-356 with 7E11-C5 monoclonal antibody suggested both had binding to type 2 muscle fibers. The reason for the discrepancy with the earlier study, which reported skeletal muscle to be negative, was suggested to be due to differences in tissue fixation techniques. Still, the most intense and definite reaction was observed with prostatic epithelial cells, especially cancerous cells. Reactivity with mouse skeletal muscle was detected with immunohistochemistry but not in imaging studies. The Indium111-labeled antibody localized to LNCaP tumors grown in nude mice with an uptake of nearly 30% of the injected dose per gram tumor at four days. In-vivo, no selective retention of the antibody was observed in antigen negative tumors such as PC-3 and DU-145, or by skeletal muscle. Very little was known about the PSM antigen. An effort at purification and characterization has been described at meetings by Dr. George Wright and colleagues (14 and 64).